Employment Immigration News Roundup
Week ending October 9, 2026
This week: DHS proposes steep new OPT fees, two lawsuits challenge USCIS and ICE policies, State Department online-presence review now covers TN applicants, and an October comment deadline and filing-policy change deserve attention.
DHS proposes $70,000 OPT fee
On October 8, DHS published a proposed rule that would require schools to pay $70,000 before recommending an F-1 student for initial OPT and $30,000 for each later recommendation, including STEM OPT extensions. Schools could pass the cost to students or employers. Nothing is in effect yet. The fees would apply to recommendations dated on or after a final rule’s effective date, which DHS proposes as 60 days after publication.
For employers, the STEM extension is the trap. The $30,000 fee applies only when the $70,000 fee has already been paid, so a student whose initial OPT predates the rule could face the full $70,000 for a STEM extension recommended after the effective date. Employers relying on STEM OPT to carry a worker through an H-1B cap cycle should plan for that. Comments are due November 9.
We explain why this is a bad way to fight fraud in our full post.
Green card policies face a court challenge
An October 5 complaint in AAUP v. Mullin, No. 1:26-cv-14527 (D. Mass.), challenges two USCIS policies. The first, PM-602-0199 (May 21, 2026), tells officers to treat a decision to adjust status in the United States, rather than consular process abroad, as a negative discretionary factor. The second, issued in August, broadens USCIS’s authority to deny without first issuing an RFE or NOID and reaches applications already pending when it issued. The plaintiffs, who include employment-based applicants, argue that both policies violate the Administrative Procedure Act and conflict with controlling precedent. They have asked the court to block both.
As of October 9, we have not identified an order blocking either policy. Filing a lawsuit does not itself suspend them. Employment-based adjustment applicants should put favorable discretionary evidence in the initial I-485 package rather than count on an RFE to fix gaps later.
For our view of the May memo, see our earlier post.
Universities sue over CPT restrictions
On October 5, NAFSA, the Association of American Universities, the Presidents’ Alliance on Higher Education and Immigration, and AICUM sued ICE and DHS in the District of Massachusetts. The suit challenges SEVP broadcast messages dated August 12 and August 24 that limit CPT to work required of all students in the degree program. The plaintiffs have asked for a preliminary injunction. Some schools have already paused CPT authorizations.
Employers hosting CPT interns should coordinate with the student and school to confirm that the CPT authorization remains valid and covers the employer, work location and employment dates.
TN visa applicants face expanded online screening
Since October 1, the State Department has extended its online-presence review to TN, TD, and I (foreign media) visa applicants. Applicants in these categories are told to set every social-media profile to public. The same review already applied to H-1B, H-4, F, M, and J applicants, among others.
This mainly affects Mexican TN professionals and TD dependents who apply at a consulate, including spouses and children of Canadian TNs who are not Canadian citizens and still need TD visas. Expect another preparation step before the interview, and leave room for delays in start dates and travel.
The announcement covers consular visa applications. It does not create a new CBP rule for visa-exempt Canadians applying for TN admission at the border. CBP still has its own inspection authority at the port, including over electronic devices.
Electronic filing comments close October 13
USCIS’s August 11 interim final rule lets USCIS require electronic filing for a form once it has been available online for at least 180 days. USCIS must first post at least 60 days’ notice on its website identifying the form or filing category and the date e-filing becomes mandatory. Filers who cannot e-file may request a hardship waiver on new Form I-936, and USCIS will consider whether the filer has e-filed before. The rule does not, by itself, make any form online-only.
Mandatory e-filing also changes deadline planning. Electronic filers cannot rely on the weekend or holiday rollover available for qualifying paper-filing deadlines. Check the current instructions for your form before mailing anything. Comments are due October 13 by 11:59 p.m. Eastern.
USCIS narrows weekend and holiday deadline relief on October 23
USCIS Policy Alert PA-2026-15, issued September 23, reverses 2023 guidance on how filing deadlines are counted. For paper filings received on or after October 23, a deadline measured in days by statute, regulation, or form instructions still rolls to the next business day when the last day falls on a weekend or federal holiday. Eligibility cutoffs tied to something else, such as a 21st birthday, do not roll. This weekend-and-holiday rollover does not apply to electronic filings.
Example: if a benefit requires filing before a person’s 21st birthday and the birthday falls on Saturday, USCIS must receive the filing before that birthday. Monday is too late. Confirm how each deadline is calculated before relying on the next business day.
PERM timelines still require early planning
DOL’s October 5 update lists December 2025 cases for PERM analyst and audit review, and May 2026 reconsideration requests. Its September 30 prevailing-wage table lists June 2026 requests for H-1B and PERM. The reported August average for PERM analyst review was 336 days.
That average is historical, not a promised turnaround for a new filing. Employers should build prevailing-wage and recruitment time into sponsorship plans well before a worker approaches an immigration deadline.
DOL’s March 2026 proposal to raise prevailing wage levels for H-1B, H-1B1, E-3, and PERM has not been finalized. As proposed, the new levels would apply to new LCAs and PWD requests filed or still pending on the effective date; a final rule could change those transition terms. Employers with PERM cases in the PWD queue should model the proposed levels now.
Court blocks $100,000 H-1B payment policies
On September 30, a California federal court vacated the agency policies implementing the $100,000 H-1B payment requirement and barred enforcement of those policies pending the required rulemaking. The First Circuit appeal concerning the original fee is a separate proceeding. Litigation remains ongoing, so verify the latest court orders and agency instructions before relying on the September 30 ruling. Check USCIS’s H-1B page before filing.
Planning a work-visa filing or employer-sponsored green card? Explore our TN visa and PERM services, or schedule a consultation with Benjamin Hamilton.
